Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T23:47:08.996Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The significance of Körber's “Typenherbar”, with an explanation of the locality abbreviations on his labels

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2013

Jiří LIŠKA
Jiří LIŠKA*
Affiliation:
Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, CZ-252 43 Průhonice, Czech Republic. Email: liska@ibot.cas.cz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The article explains the current structure of Körber's herbarium, located in the Nationaal Herbarium Nederland, Leiden (L). Originally, Körber's herbarium was composed of two separate collections. One part, Koerber Typenherbar, represents well-developed samples of each species, but they are in fact often fragments of specimens from the main collection (Koerber Stammherbar). Several examples are presented which demonstrate the relationship between both parts of the collection, various origins of specimens in the Koerber Typenherbar and their importance for lectotypification. Some specimens in Körber's herbarium were labelled only with an abbreviation or a symbol instead of a locality. All abbreviations/symbols with their explanations, kept in the Leiden herbarium archive, are listed here with information on the current names of the sampling localities in Poland and the Czech Republic.

Keywords

Czech RepublicGermanyherbariumKoerberLeidenlichensnomenclaturePolandSilesiatype specimen
Type
Articles
Information
The Lichenologist , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , January 2013 , pp. 25 - 33
Copyright
Copyright © British Lichen Society 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Grummann, V. (1974) Biographisch-bibliographisches Handbuch der Lichenologie. Lehre: J. Cramer.Google Scholar
Körber, G. W. (1855) Systema Lichenum Germaniae. Breslau: Trewendt & Granier.Google Scholar
Sundin, R. & Tehler, A. (1998) Phylogenetic studies of the genus Arthonia . Lichenologist 30: 381–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swinscow, T. D. V. (1971) Pyrenocarpous lichens: 15. Key to Polyblastia Massal. in the British Isles. Lichenologist 5: 92–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrente, P. & Egea, J. M. (1989) La Familia Opegraphaceae en el Area Mediterranea de la Peninsula Iberica y Norte de Africa. Bibliotheca Lichenologica 32: 1–282.Google Scholar
Wirth, V. (1970) Studien zu den silicolen Opegrapha-Arten O. horistica, O. zonata und O. gyrocarpa . Herzogia 1: 469–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar